Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Telephone Toughguy Date: Nov 29, 2007 9:56am
Forum: opensource_audio Subject: Re: Open Source?!?

We speak not this way here since the "relearning". I would keep such subversive "common sense" to yourself before you are tagged a racist xenophobic warmonger. I learned it is wrong to stand for what is right and that the constraints of the entropy theory of chaos and order is correct. The universe is moving to a state of higher chaos and less order. Basic common sense and the rights afforded by the constitution are not welcome here. Remember what moments you have left and start hording non perishable food ammunition and do not wake the masses or stir any revolt against thieves, murderers and conspiracists that you share a library card with here... and so you know, my sarcasm is rarely understood and is an aquired taste for sure.

Art Moncrief

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mersh Date: Nov 29, 2007 10:22am
Forum: opensource_audio Subject: Re: Open Source?!?

Heh no, I appreciate the sarcasm. You sound like a reader of Adbusters... and if not, I think you'd like the magazine.

The reason I posted is not because I am morally opposed to posting someone else's work... it's just that I'd like to see this be a reliable source of truly public domain material from which I may capitalize, without fear of being sued down the road by some litigious smurf.

They say they are officially a "library" and I'd love to support that with my time and funds. But seeing things like Bon Jovi album cuts in the public domain audio section make me question how legitimate a source the owners of this library want to be.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mersh Date: Nov 29, 2007 10:27am
Forum: opensource_audio Subject: Re: Open Source?!?

OTOH.....

If, let's say this one Bon Jovi clip, HAS been released into the public domain by the composer (who actually is not likely to own the rights to his own material)... then perhaps there needs to be a series of "justification" levels, just as there are different "commons" levels.

I.e., each piece that is listed as public domain, should require that the uploader in addition to selecting a creative commons license, also select a "Creative Justification" for calling this piece of work "public domain".

So you could have one level that is "This piece was entirely created by me, and is not derivative of any other work."

And a level that says "This was derived from works that were specifically released into the public domain"

and maybe one that says "Well, I found it on YouTube"


etc....

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Isaac Jacobs Date: Nov 29, 2007 6:30pm
Forum: opensource_audio Subject: Re: Open Source?!?

You mentioned this section being regarded as the public domain section, which it is not. If you were referring to another place, then please correct me.

A Creative Commons licensed work is by definition not in the public domain. That is worth clarifying. Just because you find something in the archive doesn't mean that it can be used for commercial purposes. In fact, I specifically disallow this for all of my work. I have never made a dime off of my music, and if someone else is, then they better share that with me. In that regard, I license my music as noncommercial always without exception.

I would figure that most would have a similar opinion to me in this matter. As a good rule of thumb, I figure that anything with a license explicitly posted on it can be trusted.

Finally, I do agree that there needs to be some culling. This collection certainly is not browsable, and there are gobs and gobs of nonsense uploads to be found. Perhaps even the stuff which I post is improperly classified. (I post entire albums only, I couldn't figure out the "netlabels" concept, and the description seemed to say it was only for electronica.) My personal conception of the term "open source audio" was that the source tracks for any individual song are all available. In that case, I would gladly upload mine if someone requested them. That's my own justification for posting my work to this collection.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Telephone Toughguy Date: Nov 30, 2007 7:54am
Forum: opensource_audio Subject: CC license

They I inderstand it, the non commercial only applies to the reporduction of the works and distribution for profit of that work, not using that work in another work that can be commercially viable. Also the non commercial aspect usually refers to using sounds to advertize the sale of said sounds. You could use a CC licensed work to sell something else, so long as you attribute properly.

The powers that be for the most part are ignoring the wealth of media under CC license as it encroaches on the elitest hollywood crowd's strangle hold on what we are allowed to consume at their trough and who gets to be the pigs and the dogs on the farm. There is no measurable qualitive difference in the talent levels of unsigned and signed artists... it is the marketing and davinci code like cabbala of snobs and elitists keeping the talented working in service and undustry instead of where they are most genetically disposed to produce the most benefit to mankand.

But since this is not socialism and the dollar rules we must consume what we are told is good and miss out on the awesome talent that will never see the light of day. Until the mean average of intelligence rises and things become less objective, emotional, sentimental and culturally enforced, crap smeared on a tampon will be considered art in san francisco and idiots listening to 4 minutes of silence will think they are listening to avant garde music. Absurdity with no emotionally redeeming qualities and a minimal message . In protest, I am naming all my stuffed animals mohamed, moses, jesus and buddha and some random hindu god. Can I select the person to administer the lashes?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Harmsichord Date: Nov 30, 2007 9:35am
Forum: opensource_audio Subject: Re: CC license

>Can I select the person to administer the lashes?

I'll crack that whip.

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)